Okay, I'll take a turn at batting the hornets nest around a little...   :)

Many of the Lancair airplane accidents appear to be the result of stalling
the airplane at low altitude.  I think one of the root causes is that many
Lancair pilots do not perform aggresive stall recognition/recovery practice
because of the uncertain spin characteristics of the planes.  I think
aggressive stall practice results in more instinctive, faster, more
appropriate pilot response when/if faced with a stall situation.  Without
known spin characteristics, most pilots appropriately assume an inadvertant
spin would be unrecoverable/fatal and aggressive stall practice too risky,
at any altitude.

So, I'm somewhat surprised that most kit airplane companies do not spin test
their designs, even though it's not legally required.  It seems wise to
characterize an airplane's spin behaviors, and improve them if necessary
(make more spin resistant and recoverable), through a carefully conducted
effort rather than leave it an unknown for customers to discover.  If an
airplane can easily go from basic, benign stall conditions to spinning,
and/or not want to recover with corrective action, that should be known
before some pilots/customers die discovering it.

If poor spin characteristics are known, and not corrected, then at least
everyone knows it is truely a "fatal keep out zone" and an appropriate
margin of safety can be applied to flight procedures and stall
recognition/recovery practice.  If they are predictable and easily
recoverable then the low speed, high angle of attack, edge of the envelope
can be somewhat expanded and more aggressive stall recognition/recovery
practice can be more safely conducted.  After the first-flight test pilot, no one else will fly in our Legacy until
I have carefully characterized its stall behaviors.  I just think it's too
important a risk area to leave unexplored before exposing anyone else in our
plane to the risk -- even flying under experimental registration.  We will
employ stall strips and/or vortex generators, etc., if needed, at least
until with power off, and no side-slip, both wings stall symetrically
(little to no roll off).  Is "one ball" of side-slip during a stall enough
to start a spin in a Legacy?  Are take-off/departure stalls guaranteed to
spin?  Characterizing and improving our Legacy's stall characteristics will require
flirting with an inadvertant spin which could be unrecoverable.  I think
most Legacy builder's with similar opinions would prefer to conduct stall
testing/tweeking with a clearer idea of the probability and consequences of
a Legacy's spin entry and recovery -- so why don't we spin test one?

I believe we Legacy builders could have the Legacy spin tested for less cost
than one might think.  We need a flying Legacy outfitted with a spin
parachute, an experience light aircraft test pilot, an aeronautical engineer
with appropriate experience, insurance, and money to compensate the
participants and cover other expenses.  I can only contribute to the money
part since I'm not a test pilot, nor appropriately experienced engineer
(space systems engineering), and our Legacy is a few years from flying.

Any thoughts on this proposal?  I know from reading the list that there are
several people who've been involved in this kind of work.  What would it
take to pull off?  Anyone interested in organizing this effort?  I'm willing
to contribute to a fund for Legacy spin testing.  I think there are already
over 100 Legacy builders -- if everyone pitched in $500 that's over $50K...
Anyone know enough about the details to better estimate the costs?  Would
you, as a Legacy builder, pay $500 to provide Legacy spin testing and
eliminate this vital unknown?  I'll pay more than that if needed...

Valin Thorn
Legacy Kit 173

P.S.  By the way, our Legacy absolutely will have an AOA indicator (e.g. Jim
Frantz's system) and I'm astonished that they are not already legally
required equipment in all airplanes.