Richard,
I sat in the cockpit of the Velocity a few days before the
accident. During our conversation the pilot mentioned that there was
a 50 pound bag of lead shot up front near the battery. I may go out
to the airport today and look to see if it is still there. The front
end was damaged when he hit trees and it may have been thrown clear,
or he may have removed it. I've seen pictures of the "Vortilons" you
mention. His airplane did not have them. It did have an extension
below the wing at the wing tips. I had not considered the wing or
canard incidence being off. The airplane had approximately 50 hours
TT with only 6 or so hours on an overhaul. Although it was very cold,
there was no ice that day. It was my understanding that the vortex
generators were added to the canard to combat a problem with loss of
canard lift when flying through rain because the laminar airflow
detached when the wing surface disturbed. Is that correct? He
received a vortex generator kit with the airplane but it was not
installed at the time of the crash. I'm not sure if it was for both
wings or just the canard. I'm currently a spam can pilot with a dream
of building an RV someday and trying to learn all I can about
homebuilts. I'll read the information at the link you sent me and do
a little more research. He is a very good pilot but I wish my friend
had done his homework on this particular airplane. He told me that he
had already contacted the current factory owner when I urged him to
talk to other builders and Velocity pilots. I'm not sure if that was
before or after the purchase or for that matter if it was not entirely
true and he was trying to relieve my concern. I believe he was over
confident in his abilities. We had actually discussed the loss of at
least one Velocity that I'd read about a long time ago. He thought he
might be able roll out of a deep stall. I tried to subtly convince
him otherwise. Others at the airport tried to caution him to be
careful as well. I appreciate your help very much. It is my hope
that this thread develops into something useful for other
homebuilders.


"Richard Riley" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 22:33:14 -0600, "JJS" jschneider@REMOVE THIS
SPAM
BLOCKpldi.net wrote:

:This Velocity was purchased just over one week ago and was being
flown
:by a co-worker and personal friend of mine. He did not build the
:airplane. The pilot was picked up by a farmer, (also an
acquaintance)
:who saw the airplane was in trouble and went to investigate. My
:friend was medi-flighted to OKC. He suffered broken ribs and
severe
:facial injuries, and will lose his left eye. He lost a lot of
blood
:and was extremely lucky to have survived. It is a miracle that
there
:was no fire, as he and the immediate vicinity were soaked in fuel.
He
:smelled the fuel, crawled out of the airplane and lost
consciousness.
:Then he regained consciousness and stripped his coat and shirt and
was
:stumbling around a wheat field in frigid weather trying to use his
:cell phone to summon help when the farmer drove up. He faces
another
:surgery Monday and possibly many more reconstructive surgeries
:afterwards.
:The pilot was practicing slow flight to familiarize himself and get
a
:better feel for the airplane. It pitched up instead of down and
:entered an unrecoverable stall. He tried varying throttle position
:and tried rolling out with aileron but the airplane came down flat
:with little forward momentum from about 4500 feet agl. It did not
:spin. According to my friend the main wing stalled. The canard
must
:have kept flying? I believe one of the original prototypes may
have
:been lost in the same way, with the test pilot surviving? I
believe
:that this may have been an early kit without aerodynamic
improvements.
:
:I would appreciate any information those of you in this group could
rovide on the early Velocities and their development history.
This
:airplane did not have vortex generators installed on the canard.
:Would that have helped or made the situation worse?
:
:After the initial investigation and with approval, we loaded the
:wreckage onto a trailer behind my pickup and hauled it to WWR
today.
:It was a very sobering experience that hasn't ended yet.
:
:Please, please, be careful out there.

Vortex generators on the canard would not have helped. They might
have contributed to the problem, by keeping the canard flying to a
higher angle of attack.

It sounds like a CG problem. It's possible that the plane needed
balast in the front when flown solo - 4 seat canards often do. It
could be that was exaserbated by your friend being lighter than the
previous owner/pilot. The main wing of a canard aircraft will not
stall *provided* that the CG is within the envelope, and the angle
of
incidence of the main wing and canard are correct. There are also a
few other oddball situations - picking up a lot of contamination or
ice on the main wing, but not on the canard, could cause the main
wing
to stall first. But usually it's an aft CG. The pitch up makes it
sound like aft CG is the cause.

Try to find and keep track of the WB chart from the airplane.

IIRC, early Velocities, like early Vari EZ's, tried drooped cuffs on
the outboard ends of the wings. They were later replaced by
vortilons, sticking out from the main wing LE's. There were two
deep
stall Velocity accidents that I know of. The one that was ridden
into
the ocean was (I'm told) testing a gap seal on the elevator. The
other had removed the ballast from his nose, and got turned upside
down by a DC-10 wake.

See http://www.ez.org/cp76-p2.htm

Richard (the Berkut builder, not the Velocity builder) Riley.