It’s so great to have you back on our screens…as a South African, now living in Canada, I’ve always looked forward to your videos as it reminds me of how beautiful our country is🇿🇦…so thanks so much….keep them coming😊😊👍
I'm not sure I agree with your characterisation of the safari not being aesthetically pleasing. Especially in that black/red/grey colour scheme, it is bloody gorgeous.
100% agree with you on that too! I meant the comment in a way that the aircraft wasn't designed with aesthetics in mind but more so utility - like the land cruiser, the utility gives it the aesthetic beauty we all love
Personally I absolutely love the way the plane looks, looks beautiful, the paint job is complimenting it as well! Beautiful slow flight with the big wings would be a dream! much better than the plane I fly 😅 Awesome video man, glad to see you back in the air again with the cameras!
So, how does the extra weight forward of the CG help on short landings?? I'll answer, it doesn't. Nice setup just a lot of compromises with a bigger/heavier powerplant.
Totally agree - a more forward CG definitely doesn't help on shorter landings but there are always trade offs. From my analysis, it is clear that the Safari 916 lands shorter and takes off shorter than any of the other Safari variants. This due to the larger, slower STL wing for landing and significantly more power on takeoff than any of the others. Another really important safety concern is that the plane will take off shorter than it will land, allowing for peace of mind when choosing shorter strips that are landable but aren't always takeoff friendly for most aircraft.
@@ThomasMarrow Sounds like we're on the same page! Whenever I hear of a bigger and heavier engine making a plane a "better bushplane" I feel the need to be a bit of a naysayer, as in MAYBE it does. BUT, making other changes, like the bigger wing you mention, changes things for sure. There are two builds in my area using the 916 going on currently, the engine is catching on, no surprise.
It is a similar aircraft to the Kitfox, just like the Kitfox was a similar aircraft to the Avid Flyer. The KFA Safari is larger than the Kitfox 7 and there are a few other differences from the Kitfox on the Safari. I am planning to do a video on this topic in the near future.
At that South African Rand conversion price, it's no wonder civil aviation is dying here. Who the hell can afford that to go recreational flying. Rediculous. Regards from South Africa
Not saying you should learn bad habbits but DA in this plane is mostly irrelevant unless you are on Mnt Everest or on a REALLY short strip 😇....a 50% drop in performance will still get you airborne in less than 150m (490ft) and it will still climb at more than 600ft/min. Just saying.
You’re kidding right? He’s flying a lightly loaded, turbocharged aircraft with huge amounts of excess power one up. Would I be concerned about calculating DA under the circumstances - nah. Common sense and experience suffices.
It’s so great to have you back on our screens…as a South African, now living in Canada, I’ve always looked forward to your videos as it reminds me of how beautiful our country is🇿🇦…so thanks so much….keep them coming😊😊👍
Thank you! Glad you are still around. I will make sure to keep the content coming 🔥
Thanks for sharing
I'm not sure I agree with your characterisation of the safari not being aesthetically pleasing. Especially in that black/red/grey colour scheme, it is bloody gorgeous.
100% agree with you on that too! I meant the comment in a way that the aircraft wasn't designed with aesthetics in mind but more so utility - like the land cruiser, the utility gives it the aesthetic beauty we all love
Looks don't apply
Hell yeah , bro
Nice to see you back Thomas!
Glad to be back!!
Nice one Thomsa, yes that is an awesome machine.
I want one! 🤣
Absolutely awesome....
Thank you! Good to see familiar names in the comments again!
So sick!🔥
Dankie Ricky
The Safari plane is Awesome......wish I could relocate from the USA to your country and own / fly a Safari..😊.
We could always relocate a Safari to the USA 😃
Personally I absolutely love the way the plane looks, looks beautiful, the paint job is complimenting it as well!
Beautiful slow flight with the big wings would be a dream!
much better than the plane I fly 😅
Awesome video man, glad to see you back in the air again with the cameras!
Thanks a ton Jason!
Grady Mill
How long before Thomas upgrades??? 🤔😁Awesome videos! Keep them rolling 👌
I am very tempted…
Nolan Harbor
Hi, What’s the blue knob you are turning next to throttle!? Thx for info.
prop pitch?
The blue knob controls the propellor pitch
So, how does the extra weight forward of the CG help on short landings?? I'll answer, it doesn't. Nice setup just a lot of compromises with a bigger/heavier powerplant.
Totally agree - a more forward CG definitely doesn't help on shorter landings but there are always trade offs. From my analysis, it is clear that the Safari 916 lands shorter and takes off shorter than any of the other Safari variants. This due to the larger, slower STL wing for landing and significantly more power on takeoff than any of the others.
Another really important safety concern is that the plane will take off shorter than it will land, allowing for peace of mind when choosing shorter strips that are landable but aren't always takeoff friendly for most aircraft.
@@ThomasMarrow Sounds like we're on the same page! Whenever I hear of a bigger and heavier engine making a plane a "better bushplane" I feel the need to be a bit of a naysayer, as in MAYBE it does. BUT, making other changes, like the bigger wing you mention, changes things for sure. There are two builds in my area using the 916 going on currently, the engine is catching on, no surprise.
@@portnuefflyer surely it has to be a "better bushplane" if it can haul more and climb faster than any other bushplane with the same useful load.
Compromises such as……..? I’ll wait .
@@dburton7929 Less range and payload for one, assuming that extra power is used, more drag also as the cooling demands increase.
Price with 916 please, thank you Thomas.
Prices range between 150K & 250K USD.
Rohan Skyway
Is that a Kitfox knock-off???
Same as Kitfox, right?
Similar design but there are significant differences. Perhaps a topic for a future video!
@@ThomasMarrow like to see one here in the USA
Sign me up
Isn’t this basically a Kitfox?
It is a similar aircraft to the Kitfox, just like the Kitfox was a similar aircraft to the Avid Flyer. The KFA Safari is larger than the Kitfox 7 and there are a few other differences from the Kitfox on the Safari. I am planning to do a video on this topic in the near future.
How much does that plane .costs??
The Safari costs between 150K - 250K USD dependant on configuration/customisation.
Gerlach Row
Trey Centers
I'm sure you follow Trent..
Wait KFA doesn't mean Kit Fox Aircraft? lol
Williams Mary Hall Betty Wilson William
At that South African Rand conversion price, it's no wonder civil aviation is dying here. Who the hell can afford that to go recreational flying. Rediculous.
Regards from South Africa
There are other KFA variants at more affordable prices. This will eventually also be another topic for another video
Why didn’t you know what the DA was? We’re you too lazy to work it out? Poor airmanship and professionalism.
Nice airplane though.
Not saying you should learn bad habbits but DA in this plane is mostly irrelevant unless you are on Mnt Everest or on a REALLY short strip 😇....a 50% drop in performance will still get you airborne in less than 150m (490ft) and it will still climb at more than 600ft/min. Just saying.
You’re kidding right? He’s flying a lightly loaded, turbocharged aircraft with huge amounts of excess power one up. Would I be concerned about calculating DA under the circumstances - nah. Common sense and experience suffices.