Choosing a Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) – 3 – primary safety

Posted on May 1, 2015 by Scott

Safety 01 Probably the single most important factor in choosing an aircraft is safety – and it’s usually the most overlooked and under-rated aspect of an LSA.

I remember (old geezer that I am) when motor car companies said that ‘safety doesn’t sell cars’ and they concentrated on looks, acceleration, top speed, road holding, even comfort. Volvo was just about the only company selling safety in their vehicles and as a result gained a reputation as a safety conscious, old people’s car, which has taken years to shake off. If they ever have.

Nowadays, all car manufacturers – not just Volvo – tell you how crash-resistant their vehicles are, how many airbags they have, how anti-skid the brakes and steering are. They have things like traction control and other electronic devices to get you out of the trouble your excess speed or other stupid behaviour just got you into.

So, what about Light Sport Aircraft safety? There are two main aspects to consider: primary and secondary safety. ‘Primary’ refers to the way the aircraft is designed to reduce the likelihood of an incident or accident happening in the first place. ‘Secondary’ refers to the aspects of the aircraft which reduce the effects of an incident or accident.

Aircraft primary safety can broadly be grouped into ground handling, take-off, stalling & spinning, and landing.

But first – ergonomics
Ergonomics are a good place to start, because if they are wrong for you, it doesn’t really matter about the rest. Start with something completely counter-intuitive: how quick and easy is it to exit in an emergency like an engine fire? How easy is it to release the safety belt, open the door and hop out? Think: can I comfortably sit here for 2-3 hours and fly the aircraft? Are you cramped with a passenger on board? Can you still easily operate the controls to their limits with someone else next to you? If reaching a control, adjusting an instrument or even just looking outside the aircraft are a chore, these activities will soon be minimised and put in the ‘can’t be bothered’ basket and as a result, your safety will be compromised.

On the ground
Next, on the ground: how well does the aircraft steer and brake? It is well known that taildraggers are trickier to steer and brake than nose-draggers. But less well known is that some nose wheel aircraft can be a bit of a handful too.

Whereas most taildraggers steer via feet-operated differential main wheel brakes with castering (and sometimes steerable) tailwheels, most modern nose wheel aircraft steer more directly through rudder pedal couplings to the nose leg. This has the advantage of more directional control when the wheel is on the ground. But a potential disadvantage when landing in crosswinds, as the nose wheel may not be pointing in your direction of travel when it touches down. This can lead to bent or even collapsed nose legs. So some aircraft designers have stuck with (or even reverted to) castering nose wheels, steered by main wheel differential braking – either by feet or hands. This gives slightly trickier ground handling especially when it’s windy but reduces the chances of bent gear when landing cross wind. Castering nose wheels usually have a smaller turning circle than direct steering, a particular advantage when back-tracking and turning on narrow runways. There are advocates of both systems – try both and take your choice.

In the air
First, take-off. When applying power for take-off, all single engined aircraft pull to one side due to the combined effects of gyroscopic forces from the engine and propeller and sometimes the spiralling airflow over the tail. Some aircraft have the engine offset so that it points to one side or the other to help minimise the pull – which can look a bit odd from some angles. Correcting the pull should be easy, through application of opposite rudder. However, some aircraft have a much stronger tendency to swing than others. Check out this effect and make sure it is controllable – particularly (eg) if the engine pulls to the left and the wind is blowing from the left, both of which will conspire to turn you off the runway if you don’t take prompt corrective action.

Stalling

What about the stalling characteristics? Most LSAs stall very benignly, the nose goes down gently and rarely does a wing drop – something caused when one wing loses lift before the other, for a variety of reasons, but usually because the aircraft is being flown out of balance, with the slip ball not centred. Stalling with a wing drop is most dangerous when making that low-level turn onto final approach before landing. There are a few aircraft which can bite unexpectedly when stalled – if you are an experienced pilot and aware of what’s happening, prompt action can save you. But if the characteristic is particularly vicious and/or you are a low-time pilot, the chances are you won’t survive a finals turn stall with a wing drop. Check this aspect of the aircraft with someone familiar with the type and maybe even ask an instructor to take you up high and try stalling in turns.

Now look at the relationship between stall speed and flap limiting speed. I know of at least one LSA where the stall speed without flap is less than 10 knots below the flap limiting speed. Think about it: you’re coming in to land and you can’t lower flap (eg) until 55 knots. Your stall speed without flap is 45 knots. So you don’t have much margin of speed in which to get the flaps down. Personally, I’d want an aircraft where the ‘clean’ stall speed is at least 40-50 knots below the flap limiting speed.

Spinning
Spinning is really just a stall with maintained wing drop. When I learned to fly, spin recovery was on the syllabus. The aircraft I started to learn on was a Piper Colt, which was difficult to spin – the best you could get out of it was really a spiral dive. To make sure we knew how to recover properly from a spin, we were all taken up in a Beagle Terrier – an excitable little aircraft whose bite was far worse than its bark! Nowadays you aren’t allowed intentionally to spin an LSA and spin recovery training has been replaced with ‘incipient spin’ recognition. Because unintentional spins almost always happen when the pilot’s attention is absorbed with something else, I personally believe spin recovery should be taught as part of basic training, even though most (but not all) LSAs are spin-resistant. At least you will learn instinctively to apply opposite rudder to stop the spin and then raise the nose and apply power. Check out how easy it is to spin your preferred LSA – the manufacturer is required to have carried out spin testing as part of the ASTM certification programme.

Landing
Approach speeds vary a lot with LSAs. Some require at least 65-70 knots down final, others as little as 40 knots. The faster the landing speed, the more wear and tear on the aircraft and the faster things happen if they go wrong. So in the same way you wouldn’t get into a Ferrari to learn to drive, so you shouldn’t get into a fast aircraft to learn to fly! Build your skills in slower gentler aircraft before taking on the trickier ones. And anyway, you might find you like going slow!

When assessing the aircraft’s landing characteristics, it’s important to check the correct approach speed – take it up to 3,000 feet AGL and try a few stalls. Note the indicated stall speed. Your approach speed for a low inertia aircraft like an LSA should be around 150% of that speed – much faster and you’ll float all the way down the runway; much slower and you risk a low-level stall. For example, the Foxbat indicated stall speed in landing configuration at maximum weight is in the low 30’s knots; approach speed therefore should ideally be around 50 knots. The factory manual actually says 49 knots. With one person and half fuel, stall in the Foxbat is around 26-27 knots – so approach speed can safely be reduced to 40-45 knots.

When landing, also look out for elevator authority. At least one LSA ‘runs out’ of elevator at landing speeds only slightly slower than its pilot manual advises. This can lead, at best, to a heavy landing; at worst to broken landing gear, because you can’t arrest the downward momentum without applying quite a lot of power. Usually, the reason the elevator loses its bite at slower speeds is because its travel has been limited so as to minimise the effects of inadvertent stalls – the downside is the loss of elevator authority when landing slowly.

In summary
Ground handling and flight characteristics of all aircraft are a compromise, based on what the designer/manufacturer is trying to achieve. Undoubtedly, current LSAs are among the safest handling aircraft available – after all, they mostly incorporate the latest computer-aided design techniques, they stall gently and are spin-resistant. But there are still a few mongrels among them.

Opinion about ‘pleasant’ and ‘unpleasant’ handling aircraft will always be divided so don’t rely on someone else’s personal preferences. Out there is an aircraft for you – fly as many different types as you can, if possible for at least an hour each. That way, you’ll begin to get the feel of the primary safety characteristics you like.

Next – secondary safety.

Sydney Harbour from a Foxbat

Posted on April 28, 2015 by Scott

Thanks to owner Phil Ward, who sent these pictures of Sydney Harbour, taken from around 500 feet in his A22LS Foxbat Amphibian. Only helicopters and float planes can fly around the harbour like this…time to put some floats on your Foxbat!

Click on photos for a larger view and use the ‘Back’ button to return to this page.

Choosing a Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) – 2 – speed vs range

Posted on April 25, 2015 by Scott

speed vs range After weight, speed and range are two important aspects of specification to consider.

First, a short story to illustrate. Many years ago, a group of us were flying from an airfield near the Gold Coast to the annual ‘Natfly’ event – then held at Narromine in New South Wales. It’s about a 4-5 hour flight, depending on your speed. My aircraft would cruise at around 95-100 knots; there were others in new 120-knot hot ships. So it was lots of ‘see you when you get there Pete, we’ll be in the bar’. All that sort of thing. So they were a bit surprised to find me parked and tied down when they arrived, just over 4 hours later… And it all came down to range. My little plane carried almost 120 litres of fuel and still left weight for a passenger and baggage. And there was plenty of reserve fuel for the flight. The speedy aircraft carried much less fuel and for safety had landed about halfway to refuel. So overall, although a slower cruiser, I got there first – a bit hare & tortoise-ish.

However, it isn’t a simple matter of more fuel or more speed…

To go faster you need a sleek aircraft with less drag. How’s that achieved? A slimmer fuselage profile – less space for people, baggage and fuel. A thinner sleeker (and probably smaller) wing – potentially trickier handling and less room for fuel. Possibly a composite airframe, with no exposed rivet heads to slow you down. Lots of aerodynamic work in the engine bay to reduce drag – more expensive, more chance of overheating on a long climb to smooth air or when you’re not cruising flat out?

And it’s no good being able to go fast in still air if you have to back off the speed by 30% (sometimes more) when the air gets rough. Which means the airframe has to be stronger, which means more weight, which means less for people and fuel. It can be a vicious circle of diminishing gains.

To go further, it’s relatively simple: you need more fuel. But more fuel means bigger and/or more tanks, leaving less space for people and bags. It also means the wings can’t be too slim or small as they are potentially needed for fuel. And in light sport aircraft with their maximum 600 kilos take-off weight limit, more fuel invariably means less weight available for people and bags.

As we used to say in marketing: ‘You can either have it fast, or cheap or high quality. But not all three’. So it is with aeroplanes – every manufacturer is trying for that elusive combination of high speed cruise, slow speed safety & handling, high weight carrying capacity and, last but not least, lowest possible cost. Unless you have an almost unlimited wad of cash (then, surely, you wouldn’t be in the light sport market?) you have to choose your own priority requirements and be prepared to compromise on the others.

Next – something you should never compromise: Safety

Philippines Foxbat video

Posted on April 15, 2015 by Scott

Here’s a short video of, and from, one of the Mindanao Saga Flying Club (MSFC) Foxbats, flying around their local area near Mati City – some area… (Click on the photo to go to YouTube to view).

It’s amazing how the refection of the sea paints the underside of the white aircraft blue-green. Having flown here myself, late last year when the MSFC Foxbats were delivered, I can say it is one of the most beautiful places to fly. All the MSFC aircraft, including their Foxbats, are equipped with ballistic rescue systems so you can relax and enjoy the views of land and sea!

Many thanks to Charmaine Svelte Pallugna for uploading this video to YouTube.

PS – Why don’t you take a winter trip to the sun (all you southern hemisphere residents) at MSFC and go for a flight yourself. MSFC has a great club facility with a huge runway, air-conditioned rooms with ensuites and great food. Not to mention the very hospitable people and experienced instructors! They can even teach you to fly, if you don’t already have a license.

When the wheels fall off

Posted on April 11, 2015 by Scott

wheels fall off Here’s a story my grandfather once told me.

Once upon a time, a man and a few of his friends decided they could build a new kind of vehicle. They had some knowledge and experience of similar vehicles and a lot of determination to make their idea work. They decided to call their new vehicle after a bird.

They progressed very well for a time but then hit a stumbling block – the people making the wheels for them went broke and couldn’t supply what they’d promised. So the man and his friends looked around for someone else to make their wheels. But all the others were too expensive – the man and his friends wanted to make their new vehicle as affordable as possible. So they decided to make their own wheels.

Right from the start, this proved much more difficult than they’d imagined. Although their vehicles were selling quite well – mainly because they were cheap – the wheels had started falling off a fair number. Although it appeared nobody had yet been hurt, it was nevertheless a bit of an embarrassment to the man and his friends. To try and compensate, they offered to supply free new wheels to replace those which fell off and even travelled miles to fix wheel-less vehicles themselves.

They tried tinkering with the design but whatever they did, the wheels kept falling off. Other people came along and suggested different ideas, which might work better. But they spurned new ideas, because by now this rather inflexible man and his friends had spent a lot of time and effort trying to convince everyone (including probably themselves) there was really nothing wrong with their wheels. It was the drivers or mechanics who were somehow damaging them by going too fast, too far or not oiling them correctly.

Time went on and still the wheels kept falling off. Until one day some policemen with big sticks came along and told the man and his friends that one way or another, the wheels had to stop falling off or they would not be allowed to sell their vehicles any more. Of course, the man and his friends argued arrogantly that it wasn’t their wheels that were the problem, it was the idiots using them in the wrong way and not looking after them properly. ‘After all’, they said, ‘nobody’s actually been killed when our wheels fell off”. As it actually turned out, this might not have been quite true and certainly some people had been hurt. ‘And our vehicle is very strong’, they said, ‘ so even when the wheels do fall off, the driver and passenger have a good chance of survival’. ‘Not good enough’, said the policemen, ‘you fix them, or else!’.

A short while later, soon after they had been repaired by the man and his friends, the wheels fell right off a vehicle, which then crashed into a tree – thankfully, without hurting anyone. The man (whose friends by now were disappearing) phoned the owner and said: ‘I’m sorry about the wheels but you must be very glad you bought one of my strong vehicles and as a result no-one was hurt’. The owner told all his friends what the man had said and they all vowed they’d never ever buy one of these vehicles again.

‘Which just goes to show’, (said my grandfather) ‘arrogant people only breed sadness for themselves’. That is, until the wheels fall off….

Or, as my grandson would say: ‘I’m soooo over this, can we go flying now?’.

The wonder of flight – after V1

Posted on April 10, 2015 by Scott

I never really much wanted to fly big aeroplanes – let alone airliners. Small aircraft are my pleasure and probably always will be.

And high altitudes I tend to think of as a bit boring. Low and slow is my joy.

However, here are a couple of videos which imaginatively encompass the excitement and magic of the flight deck of a passenger jet.

They are both titled ‘After V1’ – which I’m sure you’ll all recognise as the critical speed after which take-off can continue, even if you ‘lose’ an engine. Unless, like me, you only have one engine in the first place…in which case it’s probably best to abort the take-off and look for somewhere to land. Quickly.

But I shouldn’t be sarcastic and unappreciative – these videos are both short, sweet, and very well put together. Congratulations to Cesar Meloni for a couple of excellent productions.

Hope you enjoy them:
After V1
After V1- showreel

Foxbat & a near miss with a buzzard

Posted on April 8, 2015 by Scott

Subscriber James Pearce sent me this link to a video (click on the picture) which caught a near miss with a buzzard while flying his Foxbat in the UK – I didn’t know such large birds existed in good old Blighty! If you’re like me, you’ll probably miss it the first time round but we get a couple of slo-mo replays later. Makes you realise just how fast a bird strike can happen.

Please be warned – there are some quite strong expletives from the pilot, so maybe make sure there aren’t any very young ears listening.

Thanks also to James for his previous video on going around in the Foxbat.

Choosing a Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) – 1 – what about weight?

Posted on April 3, 2015 by Scott

Want to buy an LSA (Light Sport Aircraft)? Well, here are a few ‘buyer bewares’ compiled from stories and experiences of other buyers – the first is weight, probably the single most abused factor when flying light sport (and ultralight) aircraft.

Flying over ‘gross weight’ (ie over the maximum 600 kilos on a landplane LSA) is potentially dangerous and certainly illegal – as you’ll find out if you are ramp-checked. As a result of flying illegally, your insurance will probably be invalid too. It’s no good claiming the seller of the aircraft says it is strong enough to handle higher weights – if you’re over the limit you’re setting yourself up for trouble.

Weight limits on aircraft are a fine balance between strength (stronger usually=heavier) and usable load. Manufacturers set weight limits for a reason – yes, maybe the plane will fly OK over-weight but repeat over-weight flying will weaken the structure much more rapidly. Heavy and/or crooked landings in particular can wreak havoc on the landing gear if the aircraft is over its landing weight limit. Flying too fast into unexpected turbulence can also weaken the wing structure over a period of time.

So, what will your preferred aircraft actually carry? As an example, the A22LS Foxbat factory-quoted empty weight is 295 kilos. That’s a standard spec aircraft with oil and coolant in the engine and the starter battery in place. Plus all the essential instruments for safe flight. In reality, the A22LS Foxbat typical empty weight is around 305-310 kilos or even as much as 325 kilos for one fitted with a ballistic parachute. This is because a whole variety of ‘essential’ extras and options are added by owners: different control systems, VHF radio, UHF radio, extra instruments, transponder, autopilot, fuel injection engine, heavier propeller, wing strut fairings, landing light, strobes, big wheels, wheel spats, cabin heater etc etc.

Deduct the actual empty weight of the aircraft from the maximum gross and you get the usable load. This is the bottom line weight you have available for people, baggage and fuel.

Here are a few things to check before committing your hard-earned dollars:
– what is the real empty weight of the aircraft with all the extra bits and pieces you want added?
– does the original quoted empty weight (before extras) include oil, coolant, battery and all essential instruments? Get a signed statement from the seller to confirm.
– how much does that leave you for:
– people, bags and fuel?
– headsets?
– tie-down kit?
– maps/ERSA/iPad/GPS?
– water to drink & food to eat?
– aircraft weather cover?
– a litre of fuel weighs around 0.72 kilos. After deducting the weight for yourself and a passenger, what weight is left for fuel?
– how many litres is that and how long/far could you fly on that amount?
– or, after filling full of fuel, what’s left for people, bags and all those bits and pieces?

As an example – full fuel (long range tanks) in the Foxbat weighs just on 80 kilos, so a starting rule of thumb for the A22LS model is that it will carry around 200 kilos of people and bags after filling with maximum fuel. Every litre less fuel gives you about 0.72 kilos more for people and bags – eg: 20 litres = about 14.5 kilos.

So in summary – flying over gross weight can cost you, in order: your life, your health, your license, your money. Not to mention grief for your loved ones when something breaks and you are injured or worse. In the eyes of the law, ignorance is no defence.

For those who want to learn more, here’s a link to an excellent article on PilotFriend website which gives a lot more information about the risks of flying overweight: Aircraft weight and balance

Check out your true empty weight, your load, and fly safe!

A22LS Foxbat service advisory notice – update

Posted on March 30, 2015 by Scott

Further to my recent information about checking the cardan rings on the A22LS BEFORE THE NEXT FLIGHT – here is a very short video clip showing what needs to be done:

A22 Foxbat Flaperon Connection Ring Service Bulletin Video

Aero-towing with the A22LS Foxbat

Posted on March 23, 2015 by Scott

Last February [writes Roger Brown, Chairman of the the Vintage and Classic Glider Club of New Zealand] the Club was to hold its Annual Rally at Taumarunui. However due to unforeseen circumstances the tow plane that we were to be operating with ‘fell over’ less than half a day short of our rally starting. A Recreational Light Aircraft, a Foxbat, was generously offered as its replacement by the Foxbat NZ Distributor [LiteFlight Green]. The Vintage Kiwi team gratefully accepted the kind offer and thus were able to continue with the rally and have a great week’s flying.

This is my own personal view of having used the Foxbat as a glider tug for that week and the increasing use of Recreational Light Aircraft in that role here in NZ.

General overview
In all of my years of gliding, I guess there have not been many tow planes that I have not been towed by. However they can be easily grouped into the two main aircraft types that are generally used here in NZ for towing duties as a degree of comparison with the Foxbat. I have also had a couple of tows behind a high wing Tecnam and several tows with a FK9 Recreational Light over the years so am reasonably familiar with that type of aircraft operation.

1. Piper Pawnee 235/250 hp. Designed as a working agricultural aircraft, (spraying and fertiliser), it is an aircraft that certainly has the capabilities of towing any glider required in any conditions.

2. Piper PA18a Super Cub 150/180 hp. Designed primarily as a private utility aircraft that has also been used for flight training and agricultural work, it has the capabilities of towing any glider required in most conditions.

3. The Foxbat A22 is designed as a low cost Light Recreation Aircraft, but is capable of towing a selection of gliders as required, as I see it.

The Foxbat A22 Specification.
However it is interesting to look closely at the Foxbat’s specs. Because, other than its lower weight and much lower horse power, its wing loading, and speed range is not far short of a big Piper Pawnee which came as a surprise. A design envelope of +4 -2 g would certainly give some confidence. Place into that equation a max cross wind component of 14 knots, a cruise duration of 6.25 hrs plus reserve, a VNE of 120 knots running on 95 mogas and with a 100hp Rotax combined air / liquid cooled engine and you do have a very handy two-seater light weight aircraft indeed. With an impressive fuel economy which would certainly be one of its big selling points along with an engine life of 2000 hrs TBO, with an achievable initial outlay cost, a Recreation Light aircraft has to be a very tidy package indeed as far as any gliding club treasurer is concerned.

But like the Pawnee and the Cub, it also an aircraft that was not specifically designed to go towing gliders, but it can, and does, and like any towing aircraft, will perform well as long as it tows within its own performance parameters.

Actual Operations at the Vintage Kiwi Rally.
The Vintage Kiwi Rally at Taumarunui attracted some 14 sailplanes including an ASK 21 and a Grob Twin Astir MK3. Other than three pilots who had towed behind a Recreational Light Aircraft before, the rest were flying a little in to the unknown. We used the shorter towrope that came with the aircraft that was successfully used launching at the Drury Champs a couple of weeks beforehand. This worked very well and allowed the Foxbat to easily climb out at 400 – 500 ft per min rate of climb. Obviously with only 100hp on hand there were no real margins to play with in this towing environment, as Taumarunui airfield is surrounded by hills and very high country, so very accurate flying was required by all. Reminded me very much of towing behind a Tiger Moth, same overall skill set applies – accuracy. There was really was no wind for the whole week (only when a thermal came through) and the ground temperature was some 28 – 30 Degrees C – very warm.

The Foxbat was utterly reliable and performed very well. Overall it did a total of 48 launches. On one day it did some 14 launches. We were able to launch the ASK21 with two POB, but felt more comfortable with launching the Twin Astir with only one aboard which is where it was felt the Foxbat’s limit was, with this operation, from this airfield, in these hot arid conditions. However, that decision may well have been changed if this combo were flying from a flat and more benign area, such as Matamata as an example.

However, we did have one ‘upset’ at 600ft and one aborted take-off to be fair. The ‘upset was caused by a very powerful King Country thermal that tossed the Foxbat badly off line. The glider pilot released straight away – problem solved. The aborted take-off was caused by low acceleration and a bad wing runner. The glider released – problem solved once again. However after a slightly different approach to the operation by the tow pilot and wing runner, there were no further issues and every one continued to be launched behind the Foxbat absolutely trouble free. I am told that the visibility from the Foxbat is apparently awesome, especially on its way down after release, when one can initiate a very steep descent profile because the engine remains at a constant temperature (no air cooled potential spiking issues here).

[Click here to view a short video about the Foxbat glider towing at the Gliding Club of Victoria, Benalla Airport.]

The Big Question that I have always asked myself is, “Can a Recreational Light Aircraft fit into the NZ Gliding Club scene as a ‘stand-alone’ club work horse?”

For me, the jury is still out – I have to say mainly due to my still limited overall exposure to operating with such an aircraft. However as far as the Vintage and Classic Glider Club were concerned, it did perform very well with the range of gliders that turned up for that week, and slotted into our operations like a ‘pro’. However we were operating in very good pristine conditions. How a Recreation Light would have performed with a descent gusty cross wind, and with some real wind bouncing off the many hills that surround the airfield I am not sure.

Ho Kookaburra wever, a club such as Aviation Sports based at the Whenuapai Air force base in Auckland, who have operated a FK9 for a few years now would be far better placed to comment. The Taranaki Gliding Club at Stratford is another club to have gone down the Recreational Light direction having just unpacked their new Eurofox Recreational Light to take over from their big Pawnee, which has now been retired. It should be flying shortly.

The Canterbury Gliding Club has also recently received their new Recreational Light to supplement their operation I understand. So there is defiantly a move into that direction and the next 12/24 months or so will more truly reflect on their towing abilities, as well as their true maintenance and operating costs as the towing hours and cycles start to build up.

However for a small – low hour – club it could also turn out to be the actual saving of such a club just in the sheer economics of operating such a tow plane, all things considered. For a bigger club it would certainly price average their launching and operating costs for their members to benefit from.

Service life span as a tow plane? Who knows, but really who would have thought that clubs would still be operating tow planes that date back to the 1960’s and are still towing with them some 54 years later. I certainly would not have put money on that one, I have to say.

The Vintage and Classic Glider Club of NZ Inc. wishes to thank Ian Williams, and Jim Lyver for bringing the Foxbat down all the way from Mercer and to tow for us. And of course to Doug King, the owner and NZ Distributor for the Foxbat for allowing a group of people whom he had never really met before, to commandeer his aircraft so as to have a wonderful weeks’ – ‘boys with their toys’ – gliding in the heart of the King Country and its amazing soaring areas. We were truly grateful for your support.

Roger Brown, Chairman, The Vintage and Classic Glider Club of NZ Inc.

Foxbat Pilot

All things Aviation for Foxbat Flyers