Kit crash kills seven
 

A sad occurrence that should be learned from in due course:

Kit Crash Kills Seven - AVweb flash Article

As a commentator said, seven pax in a six seater? Where was the c of g?

I believe the CA9 toilet it fitted with a seatbelt and useable as a passenger seat. It may explain it. Their website lists it as seating '6+head'. I'm not familiar with what 'head' means but assume it's the the convertible seat.

Or maybe an infant on a lap?

A real shame. Looks like one fun plane.

"head" is Navy-speak for toilet

I know no more than is in that article there, but have to question whether a 1000hp, 6+ seat composite turboprop is really suited to amateur construction (and presumably also lack of independent oversight of the design standards).

There's a reason most countries insist on anything above a certain size - usually 2 or 4 seats and around 240hp, going through a deep and formal approval process, and that is basically down to the number of lives that can be lost.

G

I'm not convinced by this logic. A larger aircraft might be easier to build - more space to work in. It must be down to the design of the kit package and supervision. Presumably all the composite stuff was delivered factory built.

But there is an elephant in the room. Obesity is becoming a VERY serious issue in the UK and I believe it is worse in the States. With those luxurious seats, the chances of getting the c of g up the creek must be considerable. I would have thought that strain gauges in the undercarriage struts would make a useful indication of where the c of g actually was. Maybe it happens already.

The factory having presumably no formal quality oversight in the way that an FAA approved factory would have.

G

My experience in this field is limited to this rather good UK TV series on Channel 38, Quest:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Plane_Is_Born

In this, the man from the ministry, with white coat and clipboard, was from the PFA. I gather this is not the factory but not really the government either. In the States, it will be different but possibly similar.

In this programme, limited plastics work was undertaken. But I find it impossible to believe that, in this tragic case, home builders would be allowed to tackle plastics work on the main principal structural areas.

The EAA in the USA has much less oversight of projects than the LAA or BMAA have in the UK.

Experimental aircraft in the USA can be much larger and more powerful (like this one) than would be permitted for homebuilts in the UK.

I know having worked in the UK, that we have a lot of trouble ensuring adequate quality control is in place with kit manufacturers. The USA doesn't generally investigate it and put it to trust.

None of which tells us what happened for this aircraft, and it may be completely unrelated to the aircraft quality.

G