Velocity Slipping Demo 

Well, my thoughts will be controversial. I personally do not feel this would be a good first aircraft or one to learn to fly in for a number of reasons. There are no flaps on this aircraft so you would not be able to practice all the takeoff and landings associated with different flap settings. The stall characteristics would not give you a good training scenario for learning stalls and stall recovery. Landing a canard aircraft is very different from other General Aviation aircraft. You do not flare it. You basically break the decent and let it settle to the runway. Your approach and touchdown speeds are faster then other GA aircraft. Xwind landings are different and challenging in a canard aircraft compared to other GA aircraft. You can't learn how to spin or recover from a spin in a velocity. Now, with all that said I'm sure there are some that have flown a Velocity as their first aircraft and don't see a problem with it. I don't recommend it.

Luring, you kidding right ??!!... Getting this bird as a 1st plane is like gitn a C 8 Corvette as your 1st car when you just finished Driving School...Best to get a High-Wing Training type plane 1st....Then, demo in a mid wing...learn that, then a Low-wing....This bird is built for speed, not, goofing off and stuff....

@@ToyManFlyer1100 my first car was a Corvette and my first bike was a Harley 1340. I trained on gliders, Cessna 172, midwing, . Just looking for a good safe expérimental plane to own.

A Velocity is designed to not get into a spin. With that said. When the aircraft was originally designed the CG allowed the main wing to stall before the canard and as such you could not get it out of the stall and in theory a flat spin. Not a good thing. So they changed the design a little and changed the CG to the point that the canard will stall before the main wing and as such you could not get the plane into a spin. Now, I'm sure some bozo could get it into a spin but if you did you would not be able to recover and since the design change there have been no reported incidents of someone getting a Velocity into a spin.

@@bgaudioso that's a good track record

The earlier models of the Velocity had that feature similar to the Varieze's where you could push in both rudders and they kind of acted as a speed brake. Mine does not have that feature. My rudder pedals are independent. Many Velocities have a speed brake. My aircraft does not have a speed brake. It was felt that with a constant speed prop and retractable gear getting down would not be a problem. I will agree that it is not a problem.

@@bgaudioso I wonder if you would get a pitch-up moment doing so, considering how tall the rudders are above the vertical C/G.

Sure. If the canard stalls before the main wing, which it does. The main wing never gets slow enough to need or be able to benefit from having flaps. The reason non canard aircraft have flaps is so they can delay a stall. It allows them to fly slower prior to a stall. If the canard stalls at 65 Kts and the main wing stalls at 55 Kts then you never get to the point where the main wing ever stalls. I hope this helps. Watch my video on stalling it might help some. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-vSiOzmyRr1M.html

@@bgaudioso that's simply not true. That's no different than saying a conventional plane with a 65kts clean (i.e. no flaps) stall speed doesn't need flaps. Flaps are there to lower stall speed and add drag to help you get slowed down and on a stabilized approach. Canards don't have flaps because it's hard to add them to a canard, not because they don't need them. Canards are notorious for landing fast, and good luck with an off-field forced landing in the event of an engine out. This is one of the most deceptive things people say about canards. Ever stalled a little Cessna in straight and level flight? It does pretty much the same thing, airspeed hits a critical point and descent rate spikes as you enter a gentle stall. It doesn't really matter if the canard stalls first, the result is a rapid descent just like a normal stall, and if you're too close to the ground that's gonna mean a real bad time. The difference is, thanks to the lack of flaps, a Velocity stalls at 65kts, and approaches are usually flown much faster and even touchdown happens at 75 or 80kts. You fly it onto the runway like a jet, you don't flare to a stall like a Cessna because if that canard lets go your nose gear will hit first and you'll have a lovely gear collapse; it's happened before. The biggest problem is it's a single piston engine, but the slowest you can possible put it down is around 80MPH. Off-field landing survivability is dismal in canards, and with a single piston engine it's not a matter of if you'll have a forced landing someday, but when. Even Burt Rutan, the inventor of canards, switched to hybrid designs with a small canard and a smaller, more streamlined traditional tail on his later designs. That permitted the use of flaps. The V-Twin solves a lot of those problems, namely the issue of forced landings due to engine failure; however, it's a fiberglass composite craft with no lighting protection mesh embedded and no anti-ice. It tries to be a serious IFR plane, but it lacks essential safety features for flying through or even near weather. I daydreamed of building and flying one of these for a long time, and did tons of research. Since it's a kit plane it's technically possible to build it however you like, you could add the lightning protection mesh and slap a Kelly ThermaWing system on it, but you're still in an experimental plane and the price at that point would be approaching what some older turboprops sell for and well over what most certificated twins sell for.